Testimony of a hate crime

[Lube]

Man, that is twisted logic!

And what does "I experienced more decadence than hatred as part of the gay community" mean?

 

[mojoe54]

I think he is torn because he is Christian and gay. It's almost like he thinks he deserved the beating, just because he is gay. I hope that he comes to accept himself for the fag god made him.

 

[SpankThePony]

Maybe I misread it, but I think he is more concerned that by legislating against people that preach hate and homophobia that they will simply silence discussion and force people into acceptance rather than brining people to acceptance.

I don't beleive he feels he deserved the beating for a second, but he want's people to talk about why it happened and what motivates it, how these situations can develope and the attituedes behind them rather than just telling people that cant do this any more.

 

[beafous]

I actually don't believe in hate crime legislation

 

[gsdx]

In Canada, for example, hate crimes legislation has led to a ban on preaching against homosexuality.

Hate crime legislation here applies to any hate crimes. Not only against homosexuals. There can be no preaching, no mailing, no publishing of books or articles in newpapers, no letters to the editor, no standing on the street corner in white sheets and a hood.

No 'nothing'.

That is why Rev. Phelps is not allowed in Canada, and, for that alone, the legislation was worth it.

It also means that, if what happened to that guy on Thanksgiving day happened to me here, the police themselves would be in serious trouble for not investigating or offering assistance.

 

[beafous]

I think that crimes against one person, say a gay guy, shouldn't be classified as any worse than if it were against a straight person. The thing with Hate crime legislation is that it puts a law on what's in people's heads and that is thought policing. I know, this being a gay site, this comment might not be universally agreed upon and I apologize if anyone is offended, but I'm gay and sometimes I just have to stand back and look at something from an unbiased position to see what's right and wrong

 

[gsdx]

I think that crimes against one person, say a gay guy, shouldn't be classified as any worse than if it were against a straight person. The thing with Hate crime legislation is that it puts a law on what's in people's heads and that is thought policing.

You're partly right and partly wrong. Without the legislation, police could simply walk away and think he "deserved the beating" as the guy in the article said.

The legislation protects everyone. It does not stop anyone for thinking or believing anything. It's not 'thought policing'. It simply prevents them from saying or doing anything about it.

 

[beafous]

But the people who hurt or harm or do something bad to someone should be given the same punishment whether the victim was gay or straight.
But the police walking away and thinking "he deserved it" is an irrelevant issue from hate crime legislation. With or without hate crime legislation, those men should have been arrested for harrassment or bodily harm or whatever you call it. Surely that's just bad policing.

 

[gsdx]

With or without hate crime legislation, those men should have been arrested for harrassment or bodily harm or whatever you call it. Surely that's just bad policing.

Yes, it is, but you said "thought policing", which is a lot different.